Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Randolph Roy Bruce

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 22:10, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Randolph Roy Bruce

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG as a whole and WP:SOLDIER. Lettler^hello 21:24, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lettler^hello 21:24, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Lettler^hello 21:24, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Lettler^hello 21:24, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails WP:SOLDIER and WP:GNG. I assume that the page creator User:Peterbruce01 is a relative so I would also add WP:NOTGENEALOGY. Mztourist (talk) 03:03, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- per above, fails WP:GNGDelete clearly not notable by rank or awards per WP:SOLDIER, no indication of any chance of meeting GNG, also WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:31, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Devokewater (talk) 19:30, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
comment not entirely convince on him not being notable checking Trove shows some coverage over 30-40 year period see Talk:Randolph_Roy_Bruce#Trove_links none of those would meet substantial coverage criteria but they do indicate potential for more coverage in sources not online. As I'm not in South Australia I dont have the capacity to access such sources. Relying on full name google search when most records wont be using that name is not an effective judge of notability. Trove is a one of the better indicators to notability for Australians. Gnan garra 05:36, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The point about TROVE is taken, but I'm still not seeing evidence that he did anything notable. As a kid I used to like getting my name in the newspapers or my face on TV. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:06, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Looking across a range of search terms, I couldn't find any references in any newspaper databases available via NSW State Library. Cabrils (talk) 01:53, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above, fails WP:GNG. Nika2020 (talk) 12:16, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:GNG. -- Dane ^talk 04:13, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I have been unable to find any third-party, independent sourcing for the subject, so the article fails WP:BASIC. I also note that winning the MM is insufficient to pass WP:NSOLDIER. ——Serial 16:39, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.